Order The present petition is filed with a prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the learned Commissioner, Santhal pargana Division, Dumka in RMR No. 75/09-10 whereby the appeal of the appellant is not admitted as it is barred by law of limitation. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the State. 3. Perused the impugned order and other papers. 4. On perusal of the impugned order it transpires that there is a delay of about one month in preferring the statutory appeal. As observed by the learned Commissioner, the petitioner (appellant) has not explained one month delay and for that reason the appeal has not been admitted. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as there is a delay of about one month in preferring the appeal and therefore, the said appeal cannot be treated as gross delay and the appellate authority ought to have considered the request for condonation of delay liberely without entering into technicalities and thereby opportunity to contest the Appeal on merit is required to be given, but the appellate authority has not properly appreciated and considered this aspect and thereby admission of appeal is denied. In support of his contention the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner referred to and relied upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in (2012) SCCR I. 6. As against that, the learned counsel for the Respondent-State submitted that the order passed by the appellate authority is in accordance with law as the petitioner (appellant) has not explained the delay in preferring the said appeal and since the appeal was barred by law of limitation, the appellate authority has rightly denied the admission of appeal and therefore, the present petition may be dismissed. 7. Considering the aforesaid rival submissions and on perusal of the impugned order it appears that the appeal preferred by the present petitioner has not been admitted as he could not explain the delay which has been occurred in preferring the appeal. 7. Considering the aforesaid rival submissions and on perusal of the impugned order it appears that the appeal preferred by the present petitioner has not been admitted as he could not explain the delay which has been occurred in preferring the appeal. On perusal of the impugned order it appears that there is a delay of about one month in preferring the appeal and therefore, this court is of the view that one month delay cannot be treated as gross delay and the appellate authority is required to take lenient view and thereby give an opportunity to contest the appeal on merit which is a statutory appeal provided under the law. On perusal of the impugned order it appears that the appellant's appeal has not been admitted as the same was not filed well within time. I have perused the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Paragraphs 10, 14 and 16 of the said judgment are relevant and applicable to the present case. 8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, as discussed hereinabove, and in view of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court referred hereinabove, this court is of the view that instead of entering into technicalities the petitioner (appellant) is required to be given an opportunity to -contest the appeal on merit with a view to render the substantial justice. Therefore, the matter is required to be remitted to the learned Commissioner for de novo hearing. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the learned Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka by setting aside the impugned order dated 16.12.2011 passed in RMR No. 75/09-10 and consequently, this petition is allowed. The petitioner shall submit details application giving justification for condonation of delay within 30 days from the date of this order and upon receipt of such application the appellant authority shall deal with and decide the same within one month thereafter in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction the present writ petition stands disposed of.